![]() |
Originally Posted by Huck
(Post 2125942)
I teach my kids not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
I teach my kids the time value of money. I teach my kids to never ever rely on a pension, because I watched my uncle lose his at UAL. I teach my kids that when you negotiate for four years, it's not realistic to go back to the table and say, "We changed our minds, we want more, and this time we REALLY mean it." I don't think Delta should have signed their TA. And not because of the loss of profit sharing. Because of the access Flight Ops was given to their medical records. But I do think their timeline is relevant. If we had turned down our TA we'd still be waiting, just like them. And with all this strife and litigation with our MEC, I wouldn't at all have been surprised if it had been three years or more to get another TA. Not counting on pension? Probably a good strategy, particularly if you are younger. Going back to the table and asking for more? That's funny. If you recall, one of our top items was to improve the pension. We didn't go back and ask for more, we just said "ok, we see you drew a line in the sand. Next topic." |
Originally Posted by golfandfly
(Post 2126067)
... we just said "ok, we see you drew a line in the sand. Next topic." http://weblog.timoregan.com/wp-conte...af-blowers.jpg . |
Originally Posted by kwri10s
(Post 2125943)
Go back and look at your retirement summary from FDX that you got last fall. The company had already funded for what they forcast would cost for the increased A fund. They were 4 Billion over funded for the current retirement obligation, since we did not increase the retirement. It will be interesting to see where that 4 B moves to now that it is not needed to fund retirements. Maybe it will counter balance the 4.8 Billion cash purchase price they agreed to pay for TNT.
It wasn't going to happen, period. My opinion only. Not because of the money, but because of the lack of perceived fairness with the rest of the company. So while I would have liked the A fund to have been improved, I was never expecting it to so that wasn't the reason I voted NO. Did I mention that I voted NO? Well, I did, I voted NO. |
1 Attachment(s)
Highly recommend you contact the alpa office and get a retirement analysis plan with the schwab CFP. (it's free- or paid by alpa/schwab).
Just did it and it was very insightful- a true good news story. However if you took out the pension it would be a Significantly different story that can't be overstated. Your financial life in retirement would be significantly adversely affected, unless you had another $2M stashed outside of your B fund somewhere. She will show you how your spending goals are achieved and by what sources, and how your nest egg will continue to grow or contract based on withdrawals. You will see that your DB plan will be the source of 50-65% of your spending sources, with SSC and your DC plan making up the rest. Attachment 2840 The purple bars is the annual DB plan source. yellow is DC plan. If you took out the purple the yellow would be much bigger- until it ran out! |
Originally Posted by TonyC
(Post 2126037)
I noticed you avoided the "time value of money" math problem.
. I don't care about the pension, because I can't trust it. I can live off my B fund, my outside investments and my second career. I don't plan to sit around after I leave Fedex. |
Originally Posted by TonyC
(Post 2126065)
The benefit is not, and never has been unlimited. It's based on earnings, which is based on work performed. Nothing is at risk "up front." The employee performs a unit of work, a proportion is set aside to fund the "A" Plan, and a proportion is directed to the "B" Plan. When it's the "B" Plan, The Company has no choice but to incur the entire expense immediately and repeatedly. In the case of an "A" plan, the money still belongs to The Company and the obligation can be spread over time.
Why do people believe it's too expensive for The Company to save the money, but the pilot will have no trouble? . And the inverse is true, why do people believe it's too expensive for an individual to save the money but not the company? Now I am done with this before all the little girls who's feelings get hurt because someone has a different opinion start making the personal attacks and then I get attacked for defending myself. |
I was just hoping for a COLA to the pension. I thought that was fair.
|
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 2126245)
But you tell me what the pay rates will be in 2040 ...
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 2126245)
... and now we are talking setting a side a big chunk of F/O New Hires $1500 pay check to cover his high five retirement check of 300,000K. $1,500 pay check? $300,000 retirement check? And again, IF it would require The Company to set aside a "big chunk" of the paycheck, what makes you think the pilot could better afford to do it himself?
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 2126245)
Now I am done with this before all the little girls who's feelings get hurt because someone has a different opinion start making the personal attacks and then I get attacked for defending myself. . |
Originally Posted by TonyC
(Post 2126768)
I can tell you they will be negotiated, and The Company won't agree to anything it can't afford.
So many errors, where does one start? $1,500 pay check? $300,000 retirement check? And again, IF it would require The Company to set aside a "big chunk" of the paycheck, what makes you think the pilot could better afford to do it himself? It looks like you've already started the personal attacks by calling "all the little girls." . And again, that is why the company is refusing to do so, not what I like. But I understand the logic and accept it you don't. I can live with that. There certainly are a lot of little girls on here who attack people who don't agree with them. I never told anyone how to vote on the TA, and I am still being attacked for selling the TA as the greatest contract in history. The TA was good enough for me. And I certainly never attacked anyone for having a different opinion on it. I do apologize for insulting little girls. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:25 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands